Daniel Ucko

In this role I work with APS Publications Leadership to guide and develop editorial policies and practices to ensure high standards for ethics and research integrity. This requires staying abreast of emerging trends and best practices in research ethics, both in scientific publishing and at scientific institutions. I am the first point of contact for Editors on cases involving ethics or research integrity, including procedural appeals to the APS Editor in Chief on appeals. I manage research misconduct investigations, liaising with other parties such as institutional Research Integrity Officers and other publishers in this work. I proactively advocate for research integrity and ethics across the journals.

In this role I am advising the Executive Editor, Chief Publication Officer and Editor in Chief of APS on ethical cases, as well as shaping and maintaining editorial policies regarding ethical cases. I am also acting as the first point of contact for APS editors with questions about publication ethics. As part of my duties, I represent APS at the Committee for Publication Ethics (COPE)

Part of the editorial staff for Physical Review Letters, where I primarily handle papers in condensed matter physics in the subfields of magnetism, topological materials, spintronics, electronic transport, etc. In so doing I spend a lot of time in communication with the relevant communities.

Part of the editorial staff for Physical Review Letters, where I primarily handle papers in condensed matter physics in the subfields of magnetism, topological materials, spintronics, multiferroics, electronic transport, etc. In so doing I spend a lot of time in communication with the relevant communities.

Part of the editorial staff for Physical Review Letters, where I primarily handle papers in condensed matter physics in the subfields of magnetism, topological materials, spintronics, multiferroics, electronic transport, etc. In so doing I spend a lot of time in communication with the relevant communities.

Attached to the slow muon beamline project at the Paul Scherrer Institute, one of my responsibilities was testing and preparing the moderation cryostat, a crucial piece of equipment that was a significant upgrade to the facility.

Peer Review: Objectivity, Anonymity, Trust, Completed May 2020. Peer review is an important part of scientific evaluation. This dissertation is focused on the role of objectivity in peer review. Through an examination of aspects of peer review including anonymity, trust, expertise, and the question of who has standing to evaluate research, we find that objectivity in peer review differs significantly from other uses of the term objectivity in science. In peer review it is not required for this objectivity to have correspondence to an outside world, instead it is enough for it to operate inside the “rules” of the community. Rather, the objectivity is one of judgment, cleaving to the epistemological standards of a community that are formed by background assumptions and beliefs.